I. Leptotyphlops Humili. Humilis (Baird and Leptotyphlop. Humili. (Baird
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
232.1 REPTILIA: SQUAMATA: SERPENTES: LEPTOTYPHLOPIDAE LEPTOTYPHLOPS HUMILIS Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles. habitat, locomotion and tracks. Anderson (1956), Kassay (1957), and Vitt and Hulse (1973) report on predators of L. humilis. Un• HAHN, DONALDE. 1979. Leptotyphlops humilis. derwood (1970) describes the eye. Baird (1970) and Miller (1968) describe the anatomy of the ear. McDowell (1972) describes the Leptotyphlop. humili. (Baird and Girard) tongue. Hulse (1971) reports that the integument fluoresces. Des• Western blind snake sauer (1970) illustrates the electrophoretic pattern of the plasma proteins. List (1955, 1966) presents osteological data. Fox (1965) Rena humilis Baird and Girard, 1853:143. Type-locality, "Vallie• and Fox and Dessauer (1962) describe the urogenital system. citas, Cal. "; restricted by Klauber (1931) to vicinity of Val• Murphy (1975) comments on relationships and zoogeography of 1ecito' eastern San Diego County, and by Brattstrom (1953) the races and provides an excellent key to the subspecies. Dis• to the Upper Sonoran Life Zone of the Vallecito area. Ho• tribution data are presented by Banks and Farmer (1963), Banta lotype, U.S. Nat. Mus. 2101, adult, collected by Dr. John L. (1953), Brown and Brown (1967), Dixon, Sabbath, and Worthing• LeConte in 1850, sex not given (not examined by author). ton (1962), Duellman (1958), Bogert and Oliver (1945), Fugler and Stenostoma humile: Peters, 1857:402. Dixon (1961), Grinnell and Camp (1917), Hahn and May (1972), Glauconia humilis: Boulenger, 1893:70. Jameson and Flury (1949), Kay (1970), Langebartel and Smith Siagonodon humilis: Van Denburgh, 1897:150. (1954), Leviton and Banta (1964), Lewis (1950), Linsdale (1932), Leptotyphlops humilis: Ruthven, 1907:573. McCoy (1964), Murray (1955), Pequegnat (1951), Raun and Gehl• bach (1972), Schmidt (1922), Schmidt and Owens (1944), Schmidt • CONTENT. Nine subspecies are recognized: boettgeri, ca• and Smith (1944), Soule and Sloan (1966), Slevin (1950), Tanner huilae, dugesi, humilis, levitoni, lindsayi, segregus, tenuiculus, and Robison (1960), Twining and Horn (1941), Van Denburgh and utahensis. (1912, 1924), Van Denburgh and Slevin (1913, 1914), Williams, Chrapliwy and Smith (1961), and Zweifel (1954, 1959). Other pa• • DEFINITION. This is one of the largest species of the genus pers giving Mexican locality records are listed in Smith and Smith (maximum total length in L. h. cahuilae 389 mm). Supraoculars (1976). are absent, and a single supralabial is anterior to the ocular. Dorsal scale rows (vertebrals) number 210-308, subcaudals 12• • REMARKS.Klauber (1940) places this species in the "dulcis• 21, and there are 10 or 12 rows arol1nd the tail. Five or seven of humilis" group which is equivalent to the dulcis group of Peters the dorsalmost scale rows are pigmented in various shades of and Orejas-Miranda (1970). Other species in this group are dulcis, brown. The mean of body length/diameter ranges from 41 to 63 a/finis, anthracinus, brevissimus, dimidiatus, dugandi, joshuai, in the 9 geographical races; mean of body length/tail length koppesi, macrolepis, maximus, bressoni, salgueiroi, and ungui• ranges from 19 to 25. rostris. Characteristics of this group are enumerated by Klauber • DIAGNOSIS.L. humilis is distinguished from all other United (1940). States, Mexican and Central American species by the absence • ETYMOLOGY.The Latin humilis means small, or ground• of supraoculars, the presence of a prefrontal, and nasals which dwelling; boettgeri, dugesi, levitoni, and lindsayi are patronyms do not extend posterior to the eye. for Oskar Boettger, Alfredo Duges, Alan E. Leviton and George • DESCRIPTIONS. Best descriptions are found in Klauber E. Lindsay, respectively; segregus refers to the isolated geograph• ical distribution of the race; cahuilae is in reference to Lake (1940) and Murphy (1975). Other descriptions are found in Bou• Cahuila near the type locality; utahensis for the state of Utah: lenger (1893), Cope (1900), Ruthven (1907), Van Denburgh (1922), and tenuiculus is derived from the Latin tenuis meaning slender Stebbins (1954, 1966), Wright and Wright (1957), Smith and Lar• sen (1974), and Conant (1975). + culus meaning small. • ILLUSTRATIONS.Drawings of head scales appear in Cope, I. Leptotyphlops humili. humilis (Baird and 1900 (boettgeri); Taylor, 1939 (cahuilae); Taylor, 1940 (dugesi); Klauber, 1940 (utahensis); Schmidt and Davis, 1941; Stebbins, Girard) 1954, 1966 (humilis); Conant, 1975 (segregus); and Murphy, 1975 Rena humilis Baird and Girard. See species synonymy. (levitoni and lindsayi). Black and white photographs ap• Leptotyphlops humilis humilis: Klauber, 1931:340. pear in Wright and Wright, 1957 (humilis); and Fowlie, 1965 (humilis, cahuilae, segregus, and utahensis). Color photographs appear in Cochran and Goin, 1970 (humilis); Leviton, 1972 (hu• milis); and Shaw and Campbell, 1974 (humilis). List (1966) figures L.._ '-'-' -' -'C~=-"_-! the skull and other osteological features of L. h. cahuilae. Un• '-'-'- I I derwood (1967) discusses and illustrates the visceral anatomy and l visual cells. The hemipenes have not been figured or described. ·.....·_·'4""'\. • DISTRIBUTION.L. humilis inhabits Lower and Upper So• noran life-zones from sea level to over 1500 meters in a variety of habitats, but usually in the vicinity of loose soil and moisture. It occurs from the Big Bend area of West Texas westward to southern California, north to southern Nevada, southwestern Utah and southcentral New Mexico, and south to Colima and Baja California, including Santa Catalina, Carmen, Cerralvo and Cedros islands. Distribution maps are in Klauber (1940), Stebbins (1954, 1966), Wright and Wright (1957), Conant (1975), Fowlie (1965), Shaw and Campbell (1974) and Hardy and McDiarmid o 200 (1969). I , • FOSSILRECORD. None. • PERTINENTLITERATURE. Klauber's (1940) revision is the most comprehensive work on the taxonomy and ecology of this species, and provides a summary of distributional data and a review of the literature prior to 1940. Brattstrom and Schwenk• meyer (1951) comment on abundance, food habits, parasites, and the effects of moonlight, temperature, and humidity on periods of activity. Wright and Wright (1957) summarize most of the pub• lished life history and ecological data for U.S. subspecies. Fitch (1970) summarizes reproductive data. Punzo (1974) presents de• MAp. Solid circles mark type-localities; open circles are other tailed analysis of food preferences. Mosauer (1936) reports on records. Overlapping patterns indicate areas of intergradation. 232.2 • DIAGNOSIS.Differs from all other races in having a combi• 7. Leptotyphlops humilis segregus Klauber nation of 12 scale rows around the middle of the tail, more than 257 dorsals (257-283, x = 272), 7 to 9 pigmented dorsalmost scale Leptotyphlops humilis segregus Klauber, 1939:67. Type-locality, rows, fifth middorsal scale not much wider, if any, than sixth, "on Chalk Draw, Brewster County, Texas." Holotype, U.S. and 15-21 (x = 17.9) subcaudals. Nat. Mus. 103670, adult, collected by T. F. Smith on 11 Au• gust 1936, sex unknown (not examined by author). 2. Leptotyphlops humilis boettgeri (Werner) • DIAGNOSIS.Differs from other races in having a combination of 10 scale rows around the tail, more than 250 dorsals (261-275, Glauconia boettgeri Werner, 1899: 116. Type-locality, "un• x = 271), 12-16 subcaudals (x = 14), and the 7 dorsalmost scale known." Smith and Larsen (1974) restricted the type-locality rows pigmented. to La Paz, Baja California, Mexico. Holotype, Naturhisto• risches Museum, Vienna 15455, adult, sex, date of collec• tion, and collector unknown (not examined by author). 8. Leptotyphlops humilis tenuiculus (Gar• Leptotyphlops humilis slevini Klauber, 1931:338. Type-locality, man) "La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico." Holotype, California Acad. Sci. 53721, adult, collected by J. R. Slevin, 2 June Stenostoma tenuiculum Garman, 1883:5. Type-locality, "San Luis 1921 (not examined by author). Potosi, Mexico." Holotype, Mus. Compo Zool. Harvard Univ. {-eptotyphlops humilis boettgeri: Smith and Larsen, 1974:95. 4519, adult, collected by Dr. Edward Palmer in 1879, sex unknown (not examined by author). • DIAGNOSIS.Differs from other races in having a combination Rena tenuicula: Cope, 1887:91. of 12 scale rows around tail, 5 pigmented dorsal median scale Leptotyphlops humilis tenuiculus: Klauber, 1940:143. rows, less than 270 dorsals (244-269, x = 253), and 12-18 (x = 15) subcaudals. • DIAGNOSIS.Differs from other races in having a combination of 10 scale rows around the tail, less than 250 dorsals (210 and 244 in 2 known specimens), and 14 subcaudals. 3. Leptotyphlops humilis cahuilae Klauber 9. Leptotyphlops humilis utahensis Tanner Leptotyphlops humilis cahuilae Klauber, 1931:339. Type-locality, "Yaqui Well, San Diego County, California." Holotype, San Leptotyphlops humilis utahensis Tanner, 1938:149. Type-locality, Diego Soc. Natur. Hist. 2637, adult, collected by the County "east of the sugar loaf at Saint George, Washington County, Road Camp on 15 May 1930, sex unknown (not examined by Utah." Holotype, Brigham Young Univ. Mus. 662, adult, col• author). lected by V. M. Tanner and A. Paxam, 28 April 1938, sex unknown (not examined by author). • DIAGNOSIS.Differs from other races in having a combination of 12 scale rows around the tail, 5 lightly pigmented dorsalmost • DIAGNOSIS.Differs from other races in having a combination scale rows, more than 280 dorsals (280-305, x = 295), and 16-21 of 12 scale rows around the tail,